大般涅槃經疏 9.23

9.23

The text has two parts: first, opening the secret of the body; next, the debate. Opening the secret has two parts: 1. the question, 2. the answer. The question has four parts: 1. grasping the import, 2. raising the actual objection, 3. concluding the question, 4. requesting the answer. The first is as in the text. Second, regarding the objection: 'Yaśo[dharā]' here means 'Renowned'; 'Rāhula' here means 'Born in the Palace' (and so forth). The third and fourth are as in the text. The answer has three parts: first, a general negation; next, an admonition to listen; third, the proper answer. The first is as in the text. Next, from "This great nirvāṇa" below is the admonition to listen. From "If there is a bodhisattva" onward is the proper answer. The proper answer also has two parts: first, generally citing bodhisattvas dwelling in the great nirvāṇa, which has eight restatements; afterward, specifically citing Śākyamuni. The first text also has two parts: the first seven restatements provide the proper explanation; the final one provides the general conclusion. Within the first, the ancient explanations of bodhisattvas dwelling in the great nirvāṇa were threefold. One said: this is the Buddha, who in response acts as a bodhisattva, manifesting as a causal person to be capable of dwelling in the fruition; therefore it says 'dwelling in the great nirvāṇa'. The second said: not so; if this were the Buddha, it would still be the Buddha in nirvāṇa, so why say a bodhisattva dwells in nirvāṇa? Regarding 'dwelling', there are two kinds: 1. dwelling in faith, 2. dwelling in reality. Since he is a causal person, it is merely dwelling in faith. Someone objected to these two explanations: if he is the Buddha responding as a bodhisattva, this is still the Buddha dwelling in nirvāṇa and has nothing to do with a bodhisattva; if it is dwelling in faith, how could he perform such great deeds? Indeed, the essence of nirvāṇa transcends cause and fruition; although it is neither cause nor fruition, it can be both cause and fruition. If one views nirvāṇa from the perspective of a causal person, one says nirvāṇa is the cause because the causal person dwells in it; if one views nirvāṇa from the perspective of a fruition person, one says nirvāṇa is the fruition because the fruition person dwells in it. This is just as true nature is neither cause nor fruition, yet is fruition and cause (and so forth). We now clarify that the bodhisattva of the perfect teaching, from his initial arousal of the aspiration, constantly contemplates nirvāṇa and practices the path; therefore the text above says: "All sentient beings peacefully dwell within the secret treasury." Why should a bodhisattva of the perfect teaching be unable to dwell in the great nirvāṇa? The reason a bodhisattva is elucidated is to cite the cause to make manifest the fruition. If the cause is already like this, how much more so the fruition! This meaning is naturally established. Why say the Buddha responds as a bodhisattva, and why say that a bodhisattva cannot produce all these transformations? The text below says: "A bodhisattva dwelling in the great nirvāṇa cultivates diverse practices." Why would he be unable to dwell in the great nirvāṇa and its diverse supernatural transformations? Therefore, we do not adopt those explanations. These seven restatements all proceed from the lesser to the greater: first directly raising one Sumeru entering a mustard seed, up to the ten directions entering a dust mote; looking at them successively, they increasingly reveal the wonder of the inconceivable. Next, the general conclusion can be understood. From "Good son, I have long dwelt..." onward, Śākyamuni is specifically cited next. The text has three parts: 1. briefly explaining the method of the teaching path, 2. broadly discerning the places of skillful means, 3. general conclusion. The first is as in the text. Next, from "In this three-thousand[fold world]" onward broadly discerns the places of skillful means. This also has three parts: first, generally explaining the dispensing of transformation in the three-thousandfold world; second, specifically explaining the dispensing of transformation in Jambudvīpa; third, generally concluding all the skillful means. Specifically regarding Jambudvīpa, it also has four parts: 1. the responsive manifestation in this life, 2. explaining other lives, 3. re-explaining this life, 4. re-discerning other lives (and so forth). First, within this life, regarding 'Māyā': the *Bhadrakalpika Sūtra* translates it as 'Extremely Wonderful', the *Ruìyìng* translates it as 'Wonderful', and it is also translated as 'Mother of Great Wisdom'. Regarding taking seven steps in each of the ten directions: Héxī states: when an elephant king is newly born, he takes seven steps; the Tathāgata manifests taking steps identical to an elephant king. Yěchéng states: to manifest transcending the six destinies, he took seven steps. The *Dàshànquán Jīng* says: "Taking seven steps in each direction corresponds to the seven factors of awakening, awakening those not yet awakened." Regarding the statement about being the supreme field of merit in the southern direction: Héxī states: in the Sanskrit text, the south is the right; the right is the convenient hand, clarifying that the Buddha-Dharma takes pure precepts as convenient, hence it is the supreme field of merit. Kāishàn states: the south is the yang direction, able to give birth to all things; hence it is called the field of merit. Regarding manifesting seven steps in the west: Héxī states: the west is the rear, hence it says that with births exhausted, this is the final body. Kāishàn states: the west is the autumn direction, meaning the land of death. Regarding the north: Héxī states: the Sanskrit text says 'supreme/conquering', hence it says already having crossed over birth and death. The east is the foremost of all directions, taking growth as its meaning. From "In Jambudvīpa I manifest leaving home" onward is the second part, discerning other lives. If following the manifestation of leaving home in one direction, one attains buddhahood in this very life; now it mentions the four fruitions, so it refers to other lives. Furthermore, it is probably because the impressions and perceptions of sentient beings differ; if taking it as this life, this matter also exists, as people of the two vehicles all say the Tathāgata is an arhat. The *Treatise* states: "In the śrāvaka Dharma, the stage of an arhat is called the stage of a buddha (and so forth)." From "In order to liberate..." onward is the third part, re-discerning the matter of attaining buddhahood in this life. Śuddhodana is also written as Yuètóután, translated here as Pure and White, and also as Pure Rice (and so forth). Gautama: the *Samantapāsādikā* translates it as 'Extirpating Evil', and the *Āgama* says 'Pure and Virtuous'. From "I also manifested..." onward is the fourth part, re-discerning other lives (and so forth).